Shooting at Connecticut Elementary School

I was just looking at what Ice posted and I think to myself that the adage of how you shouldn't say anything if you don't have anything nice to say applies here. Yes, we all get that this isn't necessarily personal, yes, there are possible detrimental effects of constant broadcasting of shooters, yes, it may be irritating to see news of this interrupting your plans and TV shows but for the love of all that is good and holy would it be so damned difficult to show some sympathy or shut up if you don't give a damn?

It's in times like these you see how sick humanity really is.

Ffs, If anyone has a Facebook, I'm sure you've seen this, but people are pulling fake pictures/pictures from other events off the internet, claiming they're from the shooting, and using them to get "likes" and fans.

You would figure people who have the decency to show AN OUNCE of respect to people during these times, instead of using them to give their ego a boost.

It's in times like these you see how sick humanity really is.

Ffs, If anyone has a Facebook, I'm sure you've seen this, but people are pulling fake pictures/pictures from other events off the internet, claiming they're from the shooting, and using them to get "likes" and fans.

You would figure people who have the decency to show AN OUNCE of respect to people during these times, instead of using them to give their ego a boost.

...no word exists for me to explain the feeling I get when I hear about this crap. Rage might suffice but it's not nearly enough.

Today's shooting
http://www.cbc.ca/m/touch/world/story/20...oting.html
It seems like you really need to get working on those gun control laws.

Today's shooting
http://www.cbc.ca/m/touch/world/story/20...oting.html
It seems like you really need to get working on those gun control laws.

Let's not start that here. In any case, that video I posted seems to be proving somewhat true so far. Good thing there were policemen there to stop the guy.

Today's shooting
http://www.cbc.ca/m/touch/world/story/20...oting.html
It seems like you really need to get working on those gun control laws.

Actually the news is going to try to double down on all gun related shootings now in order to tie it into this story. In this way if they gain enough coverage, some other reporter can write a second opening page piece on the consequences of the shooting implying that it is a pervasive issue and not an isolated one around the world.

I saw Obama's address today. Yeah, sure, touching and all that, look at the president he is so pineappleing sensitive he's crying about little kids; until you notice that during most of the address he's looking down at the sheet of paper his PR guys wrote out for him. He really needed to parrot out someone else's opinion for THIS? If there were any time for a REAL speech, it would be now. I'm not saying most other presidents haven't done the same thing, but regardless of how many times I see it, it's still insulting in so many ways.

I'm sure Obama would have had lots more to say but can't because he's President. In terms of PR, reading off a script is pretty much required. In an emotional glass foundation like this, if Obama had misspoken or had gone out of line emotionally, the media would have been all over it. That speech was probably double tripled checked by the best speech writers in Washington, perfectly tailored to address the situation in so doing that nothing can be taken out of context and be used against him.

Really, people...

-snip-

I think that this may be more disturbing than the shooting itself.

Seriously, what the fuuck at all of this?

I saw Obama's address today. Yeah, sure, touching and all that, look at the president he is so fucking sensitive he's crying about little kids; until you notice that during most of the address he's looking down at the sheet of paper his PR guys wrote out for him. He really needed to parrot out someone else's opinion for THIS? If there were any time for a REAL speech, it would be now. I'm not saying most other presidents haven't done the same thing, but regardless of how many times I see it, it's still insulting in so many ways.

Political Correctness. Obama goes out on his own, on an unmoderated message, and he will get DESTROYED by something he said, regardless of his true meaning of whatever it is that he said.

It's a sad world when this is required, but if you are not politically correct, especially in his position, you get fuucked when you make the tiniest of mistakes.

Hell, just look back on the Political Debates. I bet you can find 100 examples of him saying one thing, and the News/Media skewering it out of control into something insane that wasn't his meaning at all and everyone knows it. Yes, the debates are over, but the Political Correctness will never end, especially for the President. He must be politically correct at all times or face the wrath of stupidity.

I'm sure Obama would have had lots more to say but can't because he's President. In terms of PR, reading off a script is pretty much required. In an emotional glass foundation like this, if Obama had misspoken or had gone out of line emotionally, the media would have been all over it. That speech was probably double tripled checked by the best speech writers in Washington, perfectly tailored to address the situation in so doing that nothing can be taken out of context and be used against him.

So what? Sometimes, it's worth bad press if you are actually being genuine. People that actually saw the speech would easily be able to tell that was not on script and would give him points just for that. I'm definitely that type of person; honestly, I feel like the more effort you put into pre-planning a speech, the less genuine it really is, because you are essentially trying to equalize out any and all actual content to the point that it's just a collection of words and not really anything significant. That's what almost every political speech sounds like to me, these days; a worthless waste of time that accomplishes nothing because no real, personal viewpoints are actually expressed.

Or he was holding his head down to keep his composure.

I found this story in Spanish: http://www.proceso.com.mx/?p=328025

Here's the girl's story in English: http://www.people.com/people/package/art...03,00.html

Victoria Soto, 27, a first-grade teacher at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., ushered her students into a closet, and in so doing placed her body between them and the assailant.

Reminds me of a teacher that calmed her students by having them sing during a shootout in Mexico.

When it get's down to it the only form of gun regulation that could be imposed that would make a significant difference would be for you to forfeit your privacy upon purchasing one. Heavy scrutinizing, yet this could be abused to be another custom's cluster fu`ck.

The mother obtained the weapons legitimately, and from what I can tell was psychologically sound besides being paranoid. The son didn't really reflect any threatening demeanor besides being the "stereotypical" genius gamer. It's only now we see the criticism as he has done the act.

I found this story in Spanish: http://www.proceso.com.mx/?p=328025

Here's the girl's story in English: http://www.people.com/people/package/art...03,00.html



Reminds me of a teacher that calmed her students by having them sing during a shootout in Mexico.

I just read that story. It is both inspiring and saddening because she died protecting them, may she rest in peace knowing she did the right thing.

Or he was holding his head down to keep his composure.

Then he is too weak to be the leader of the free world.

Then he is too weak to be the leader of the free world.

This is the reason why they listen to their PR people. Because people like you will look at something so negligible as him looking down, whether to check his notes, or to gain composure, and suddenly you think you can infer what it is he is doing, or that what he is doing suddenly makes him unfit to be president.

If he were crying every other day because of this and that, sure, I'd maybe agree. But this is a man with children of his own who is also responsible for protecting these children that were killed, and for that not to effect him would be more shocking to me than him having to look at his notes for a moment v

Lets look at it this way; if he's crying over kids he doesn't even know, what would happen if terrorists kidnapped HIS children? Would he do the right thing, or would he give in to their demands? If he isn't desensitized to this sort of thing he has been living a sheltered life, and a person that has been living with blinders on all of his life isn't fit to lead either, as that person would be completely out of touch with reality.

That, or he's faking it, which is a much simpler and more logical explanation.

Lets look at it this way; if he's crying over kids he doesn't even know, what would happen if terrorists kidnapped HIS children? Would he do the right thing, or would he give in to their demands? If he isn't desensitized to this sort of thing he has been living a sheltered life, and a person that has been living with blinders on all of his life isn't fit to lead either, as that person would be completely out of touch with reality.

That, or he's faking it, which is a much simpler and more logical explanation.

You're jumping to conclusions. I for one think it's much simpler and more logical that people can maintain their composure when speaking in public and reading a pre-made speech while feeling sad all the same.

If I were there with the people in the memorial, I think I would be so sad that I would cry too. It is both a strength and a weakness, to be able to feel and show your emotions.

I do not think the ability for one to be a president, or one's strength, is measured by one's ability to hold back his tears or emotions.

Desensitization is a consequence, not a necessity, of being in a job that demands cruel decisions. He probably doesn't have time to cry over every single thing day in day out, but there are right times to cry too, if one can even put it this way. I certainly think that there is nothing wrong with showing tears during that speech.

One more thing. I believe you are not wrong to cast doubt on him, because those are valid concerns. But I agree with Curtiss that you're jumping to conclusions too quickly. Those are slippery slopes you're playing with.

Hadriel

Wow this thread took a crazy turn and I guess I can't say I am that surprised. Some of the comments on the last page are ridiculous.

I am pretty certain that it is a policy of the U.S. government not to negotiate with terrorists, so if terrorists took the President's children I am pretty sure that none of us have the slightest idea how that would be handled. However, what I am sure of is that it would be handled professionally and wouldn't put the safety of the United States at risk.

Looks like I found someone to Ultra Ignore. Man that made my blood boil.

I can only imagine what the students themselves are thinking about. They can't see their friend again and some of them may have been best friends. I don't know how I would feel if I lost my friends at that age.